DVDizzy Forum

disneyprincess11 wrote:And with Disney Animation having the world back in its hands, they really need to do 2D animation NOW before the people go back to Dreamworks and Pixar.

And it's not too late to make Giants 2D!

Here here!

DisneyEra wrote: Why was TENG & Atlantis released 6 months apart from each other? Also, neither of these films bombed. Domestically TENG $89mil & Atlantis $84mil. That's pretty much on par with the post Pocahontas films...

Respectfully disagree.

When defining box office success, total box office revenue—including international returns—is what matters, and gross revenue is relatively meaningless without comparing it to expenses.

Generally speaking, the sweet spot for judging box office success is grossing around 300% of the budget: 1/3 to cover the cost of production, 1/3 to reinvest in the company infrastructure and personnel, and 1/3 to distribute as profit (an oversimplified model, but it’ll do for purposes of explaining the 3x = success formula).

So for the sake of comparison and contrast (numbers rounded to the nearest million):

Lilo & Stitch: ~$273 million worldwide (including $146 million domestic) against an $80 million budget, or a world gross ~3.4 x the budget. Success.

Hunchback: ~$325 million worldwide (including $100 million domestic) against a $100 million budget, or a world gross 3.25 x the budget. Success.

Hercules: ~$252 million worldwide (including ~$99 million domestic) against an $85 million budget, or a world gross 2.96 x the budget. Success.

But the parameters for success are also determined by past performance. In the post-Second Renaissance, budgets kept going up and returns had a pretty pronounced downward trend (after The Lion King, of course, there’s not much of anywhere to go but down). Even in instances where the world gross numbers are comparable, the 2nd Ren films handily outperform even the successes that follow by virtue of having much higher returns in proportion to the initial investment. Lilo, for example, handily outgrossed The Little Mermaid by some $60 million, but cost twice as much to produce; Mermaid made better than 500% its cost while Lilo earned less than 3.5 x its budget. When you consider that those dollars were worth considerably more in '89 than in 2002, and that the studio had benchmark-setting successes in flat dollar figures and ROI during the intervening dozen-plus years--BatB grossed around 17 x its budget, TLK grossed 9.4 x its budget in domestic returns *alone*, and more than 20 x worldwide--then Lilo's success begins to seem pretty conditional indeed.

TENG: ~$169 million worldwide (including $89 million domestic) against a $100 million budget, or 1.69 x budget. Miss.

Atlantis: ~$186 million worldwide (including $84 million domestic) against a $120 million budget, or 1.55 x budget. Miss.

Treasure Planet, of course...yeesh. A $140 million budget that grossed about thirty million less than that worldwide. *Epic* fail. I doubt it was just marketing failure: I didn’t watch the Disney Channel at the time, and I saw ads…but there was nothing I saw that made me want to see the film (and I’m a lifetime Disney animation fan and big fan of the source material. Honestly, I didn't understand the whole Stevenson-Titan A.E. mashup approach to the story; I would have much preferred a straighter-up retelling of Treasure Island). There’s no way in Hades that Happy Meals could have saved Home on the Range: nothing about it made me want to see it, not a single kid I knew had any interest, and it was just plain weak (I fell asleep trying to watch it, which is my defense mechanism against films that fail to engage).

I wouldn’t have any idea where to lay blame, but the decision to start rushing two films a year to the market was a poor one, considering the quality of the product simply didn’t come anywhere near measuring up to the benchmark 2nd Ren films that put the company in a position to pursue that production schedule in the first place—not to mention creating additional box office pressure and further diluting the brand by distributing DisneyToon & TV Animation division projects for theatrical release (averaging about one more film per year from 2000-2006).

Fflewduur wrote:Aladdin, for example, only outperformed Lilo by around $15 million worldwide—but Aladdin was produced a decade earlier, and on a about 1/3 Lilo's budget. (Aladdin grossed worldwide nearly 10 x its budget; BatB around 17 x its budget, and TLK grossed 9.4 x its budget in domestic returns *alone*.)

I may be missing something, but Aladdin did $504 million worldwide. How is that $15 million more than Lilo & Stitch's worldwide gross of $273 million? I think you're confusing with Aladdin's international box office ($286.7 million, excluding the U.S.).

rodis wrote:

Fflewduur wrote:Aladdin, for example, only outperformed Lilo by around $15 million worldwide—but Aladdin was produced a decade earlier, and on a about 1/3 Lilo's budget. (Aladdin grossed worldwide nearly 10 x its budget; BatB around 17 x its budget, and TLK grossed 9.4 x its budget in domestic returns *alone*.)

I may be missing something, but Aladdin did $504 million worldwide. How is that $15 million more than Lilo & Stitch's worldwide gross of $273 million? I think you're confusing with Aladdin's international box office ($286.7 million, excluding the U.S.).

Ha! I stand corrected. *Thought* that number seemed awfully low in that string of hits. Mojo mis-read. Edited.

disneyprincess11 wrote: I can picture it like:

John Lassenter: "Hey, it's not like we put PATF and Winnie the Pooh before/on the week one of the most high-grossing movies and the final movie of a beloved, epic saga or anything. And it's not like we made the first, official black Disney Princess a frog and offended black people everywhere, and made a movie about a classic Disney character, who is especially attracted by little kids, go on the big screen, instead of a straight-to-DVD..."
Bob Iger: "Nah, it's clearly the hand drawn animation. Kids want to see cool, hip idiotic 3D movies like Alvin and the Chipmunks. Oh, by the way, people are attracted to movies that have funny, stupid titles and trailers..."

That's actually almost quite accurate. I was in a bookstore today and flipped through Ed Catmull's new book and by coincidence, I stopped at the chapter where he discusses bringing back hand-drawn animation. At no point does he blame Frog's underperformance on the fact that it was hand-drawn and he's actually very proud of the movie and he thinks it's a great movie that will continue to gain its audience through the years. He mainly blames the title and the release date and completely admits that Tangled's title change to something gender-neutral was a reaction to how Frog did and what he felt was a title that scares away male viewers.

Catmull didn't bring up Winnie the Pooh, but I'm already used to that being the movie everybody forgets.

estefan wrote:

disneyprincess11 wrote: I can picture it like:

John Lassenter: "Hey, it's not like we put PATF and Winnie the Pooh before/on the week one of the most high-grossing movies and the final movie of a beloved, epic saga or anything. And it's not like we made the first, official black Disney Princess a frog and offended black people everywhere, and made a movie about a classic Disney character, who is especially attracted by little kids, go on the big screen, instead of a straight-to-DVD..."
Bob Iger: "Nah, it's clearly the hand drawn animation. Kids want to see cool, hip idiotic 3D movies like Alvin and the Chipmunks. Oh, by the way, people are attracted to movies that have funny, stupid titles and trailers..."

That's actually almost quite accurate. I was in a bookstore today and flipped through Ed Catmull's new book and by coincidence, I stopped at the chapter where he discusses bringing back hand-drawn animation. At no point does he blame Frog's underperformance on the fact that it was hand-drawn and he's actually very proud of the movie and he thinks it's a great movie that will continue to gain its audience through the years. He mainly blames the title and the release date and completely admits that Tangled's title change to something gender-neutral was a reaction to how Frog did and what he felt was a title that scares away male viewers.

Catmull didn't bring up Winnie the Pooh, but I'm already used to that being the movie everybody forgets.

Really? How very interesting. Maybe Ed Catmull Should of been the next CEO of Disney.

Fflewduur wrote:

DisneyEra wrote: Why was TENG & Atlantis released 6 months apart from each other? Also, neither of these films bombed. Domestically TENG $89mil & Atlantis $84mil. That's pretty much on par with the post Pocahontas films...

Respectfully disagree.

When defining box office success, total box office revenue—including international returns—is what matters, and gross revenue is relatively meaningless without comparing it to expenses.

Generally speaking, the sweet spot for judging box office success is grossing around 300% of the budget: 1/3 to cover the cost of production, 1/3 to reinvest in the company infrastructure and personnel, and 1/3 to distribute as profit (an oversimplified model, but it’ll do for purposes of explaining the 3x = success formula).

So for the sake of comparison and contrast (numbers rounded to the nearest million):

Lilo & Stitch: ~$273 million worldwide (including $146 million domestic) against an $80 million budget, or a world gross ~3.4 x the budget. Success.

Hunchback: ~$325 million worldwide (including $100 million domestic) against a $100 million budget, or a world gross 3.25 x the budget. Success.

Hercules: ~$252 million worldwide (including ~$99 million domestic) against an $85 million budget, or a world gross 2.96 x the budget. Success.

But the parameters for success are also determined by past performance. In the post-Second Renaissance, budgets kept going up and returns had a pretty pronounced downward trend (after The Lion King, of course, there’s not much of anywhere to go but down). Even in instances where the world gross numbers are comparable, the 2nd Ren films handily outperform even the successes that follow by virtue of having much higher returns in proportion to the initial investment. Lilo, for example, handily outgrossed The Little Mermaid by some $60 million, but cost twice as much to produce; Mermaid made better than 500% its cost while Lilo earned less than 3.5 x its budget. When you consider that those dollars were worth considerably more in '89 than in 2002, and that the studio had benchmark-setting successes in flat dollar figures and ROI during the intervening dozen-plus years--BatB grossed around 17 x its budget, TLK grossed 9.4 x its budget in domestic returns *alone*, and more than 20 x worldwide--then Lilo's success begins to seem pretty conditional indeed.

TENG: ~$169 million worldwide (including $89 million domestic) against a $100 million budget, or 1.69 x budget. Miss.

Atlantis: ~$186 million worldwide (including $84 million domestic) against a $120 million budget, or 1.55 x budget. Miss.

Treasure Planet, of course...yeesh. A $140 million budget that grossed about thirty million less than that worldwide. *Epic* fail. I doubt it was just marketing failure: I didn’t watch the Disney Channel at the time, and I saw ads…but there was nothing I saw that made me want to see the film (and I’m a lifetime Disney animation fan and big fan of the source material. Honestly, I didn't understand the whole Stevenson-Titan A.E. mashup approach to the story; I would have much preferred a straighter-up retelling of Treasure Island). There’s no way in Hades that Happy Meals could have saved Home on the Range: nothing about it made me want to see it, not a single kid I knew had any interest, and it was just plain weak (I fell asleep trying to watch it, which is my defense mechanism against films that fail to engage).

I wouldn’t have any idea where to lay blame, but the decision to start rushing two films a year to the market was a poor one, considering the quality of the product simply didn’t come anywhere near measuring up to the benchmark 2nd Ren films that put the company in a position to pursue that production schedule in the first place—not to mention creating additional box office pressure and further diluting the brand by distributing DisneyToon & TV Animation division projects for theatrical release (averaging about one more film per year from 2000-2006).

I wasn't talking about international grosses & budget, just the domestic gross of each film. But your view points are really good. I'd like to hear your take on WDFA first 3 CGI films, Chicken Little, Meet The Robinsons & Bolt. Those films also suffered from low boxoffice intake "domestic & worldwide" and criticism. But unlike TENG, Atlantis, Stitch & TP, they were not released 6 months apart from each other. Those films were a year & 1/2 apart.
Still 2000's Dinosaur was the highest grossing WDFA of the decade, with $349mil. Still surprised this film is officially apart of the Disney Animation Canon.

disneyprincess11 wrote:And with Disney Animation having the world back in its hands, they really need to do 2D animation NOW before the people go back to Dreamworks and Pixar.

And it's not too late to make Giants 2D!

Sorry but with Frozen being so successful, they are going to Frozen/ Tangled formula it. Just being real here.

Wouldn't be too surprised if Jack is turned female and has magical powers and falls in love with a Ralph/ Kristoff like giant, and the person who sells the beans to Jack be Mother Gothel/ Turbo/ Hans-ish.

thelittleursula wrote:Wouldn't be too surprised if Jack is turned female and has magical powers and falls in love with a Ralph/ Kristoff like giant, and the person who sells the beans to Jack be Mother Gothel/ Turbo/ Hans-ish.

^Ha, I remember in high school creative writing class, one person did genderbend the main character to write "Jacqueline and the Beanstalk". Another made the giant into a famous rapper, and his biggest single was "Fee Fi Fo Fum". (I was in that same class, and everyone had good twists to their stories.)

But you're right; they aren't gonna do 2D now, after Frozen broke a billion. It's gonna be like what happened after Lion King: constant animated musicals. Except maybe we'll get some interlude with the Pixar, Blue Sky, and Dream Works sequels.

thelittleursula wrote:

disneyprincess11 wrote:And with Disney Animation having the world back in its hands, they really need to do 2D animation NOW before the people go back to Dreamworks and Pixar.

And it's not too late to make Giants 2D!

Sorry but with Frozen being so successful, they are going to Frozen/ Tangled formula it. Just being real here.

Wouldn't be too surprised if Jack is turned female and has magical powers and falls in love with a Ralph/ Kristoff like giant, and the person who sells the beans to Jack be Mother Gothel/ Turbo/ Hans-ish.

I'm sure what disneyprincess11 says is a compliment.

I know I'd said this before, but is there any news for a new hand drawn/CGI short coming to accompany with Big Hero 6?

TsWade2 wrote:I know I'd said this before, but is there any news for a new hand drawn/CGI short coming to accompany with Big Hero 6?

Strangely, no shorts at all are attached yet. I'm hoping for a Wreck-It Ralph one. Maybe one that explains how Turbo took over Sugar Rush?

There's a CG short currently in production directed by Patrick Osborne.

Whatever happened to that one short, "Tick Tock Tale"? Isn't it finished yet?

Nevermind.

Semaj wrote:Whatever happened to that one short, "Tick Tock Tale"? Isn't it finished yet?

It was finished years ago. It was nominated for a VES award and was even submitted to the 2010 Oscars. It just hasn't been released to the public (outside of some festivals) much like Glago's Guest.

Sotiris wrote:There's a CG short currently in production directed by Patrick Osborne.

Any inside scoop, Mr. Insider?

disneyprincess11 wrote:Any inside scoop, Mr. Insider?

I'm afraid I don't know anything else. I'm assuming it'll be attached to Big Hero 6.

I hope its another hybrid style short!

Sotiris wrote:

Semaj wrote:Whatever happened to that one short, "Tick Tock Tale"? Isn't it finished yet?

It was finished years ago. It was nominated for a VES award and was even submitted to the 2010 Oscars. It just hasn't been released to the public (outside of some festivals) much like Glago's Guest.

Aw man. Why would Disney *not* release their shorts?